Who Are The Classic Fighter's That Destroy Wilder?

Oh Good Lord …

 

Ring magazine rankings have no impact on who ABC titlests defend against.

However, they most closely resemble independent pundit and hard-core fan rankings.

Therefore, they're the best ojective indicator of the quality of a fighter's resume that we have.

We shouldn't, neither need to, consider how "classic" fighters would do in cross era fantasy fights vs Wilder to determine his level.

He was 3-4-1, or more significantly, 3-5 based on majority scorecards, against top 10 ring ranked HWs of his own era, in fights that acutally happened.

There's no need for guess work.

He was a good but not great, dangerous, exciting, brave and limited fighter, whose achievements against HWs amongst the 10 best in the world when he fought them, reflect those qualities.

Decent fighter with crazy power, but his record is nothing special from am historical perspective.

 

If we are going to compare Deontay Wilder to say Joe Louis based on rankings, then Ring rankings are the only common frame of reference.

 

Try not to freak out too much.

They may not be 100% serious.

If they are, then I can't tell you whether to freak out or not.

Hope this helps.

 

I think there are several who should be favored to beat him including Lewis, Ali, Holmes, Tyson and both klitschkos. As for the word “ destroy “ the list probably gets smaller. Wilder for all his shortcomings was durable, hard hitting and tough

 

This is the crux of it. You hardly have to be god to beat Wilder.

Fergy has been a bit too vague in his opening post again. The header is "destroy" but inside the post he says "that your sure would defeat Deontay Wilder?".

They are two different things and the variations make for two quite different answers. Even "sure" is a misnomer as Wilders power makes "sure" a lottery for many opponents who i'd "back" to beat him.


The furthermost back i'd go personally might be Joe Louis as far as being a chance of knocking him out. He was death against big fighters with power and limited skillsets. I wouldn't go any further back, personally. Wilder would have his customary punchers chance but Shavers usually did too. Guys like Wlad and Vitali might be well suited to leaving him prone. Wlads far better skill would allow him to get in first more often than not and Vitali's size, durability and work rate would wear him down big time. Lewis would be too much for a one trick pony. Then you have to assess the historic punchers, we know their names. Tyson would be under that right hand and taking him apart in sections.

As far as beat him, guys like Ali and Holmes would begin the convo.

 

Most.

 

It's not a RANKING discussion. It's a discussion regarding who in history DESTROYS Wilder.

I know you love and follow and collect Ring Ratings, and are a true die hard when it comes to Ring ratings.

That said, I don't know why you're so dismissive of Wilder considering Deontay Wilder was ranked the #3 contender or higher in the Ring ratings every month, year in and year out, from January 2015 until January 2024.

It was a ridiculous run at the top. Nine years, every month, no lower than #3 contender in the Ring ratings.

If Ring is the BEST OBJECTIVE INDICATOR of the quality of a fighter's resume, then name (as the Ring ratings expert you are) ALL the heavyweights in history who were ranked no lower than #3 contender by Ring ...

EVERY SINGLE MONTH FOR NINE STRAIGHT YEARS?

Not barely ranked at #10. Not in the top 2, then drops to 6, then out entirely, then back in.

How many 'just decent' guys were ranked every month that high for 108 straight months?

108 straight months ... #3 contender or higher!

You can't brag on the quality of the Ring ratings ... and how they are (your words) "the best objective indicator of the quality of a fighter's resume'"... and then be dismissive of Wilder ... who was at the top of those ratings EVERY SINGLE MONTH for nearly an entire decade.

Anyway, the list of fighters in history who destroy Wilder at his best - not in his last year of a 16-year-career - is miniscule.

 

My God.

You seem to think that Wilder was some sort of ATG, or a man who would have been an ATG, but for a bit of bad luck.

 

You've got to be having a laugh. How on earth would you get that from my post?

 

Look guys, we have to be realistic about Wilder.

Yes he was a powerful and exciting fighter.

Yes he was probably one of the hardest hitters in history, despite the fact that his KO% falls very flat, once he starts fighting men ranked in the top ten.

He was one of the most shameless belt milkers in the history of the sport, if not the most shameless.

Whenever he stepped up, he was looking for a guy who was about to fall off a cliff.

The gamble paid off with Ortiz, but it backfired big time with Fury.

Once he realizes that he has lost the belts, and can't get them back via a mandatory rematch, he steps up in class.

Yes he was past his best when he lost to Parker and Zhang, but was anybody that he beat actually better than them?

I lean towards no.

Yes he was a very exciting fighter, but there is no reason to think that he dominates another era, unless you are impressed by the men he beat.

 

How many ordinary fighters were ranked #3 or higher by Ring every month for nine straight years?

You guys love Ring Ratings, but you don't seem to consider how highly Ring ranked Wilder, month in and month out, year in and year out, when you're bashing him nonstop.

 

Again, Wilder was at the end of a 16-year pro career when he lost to a 70-pounds-heavier Zhang.

The way you guys "cling" to those final losses to much bigger guys is comical.

Yes, if Wilder was fighting 188 pounders of years gone by instead of 270 or 280 pounders ... I'm sure his power would've carried over just fine.

 

Perhaps that is an argument that needs to be made in its own right, but there is going to be a strong counterargument when it is scrutinized.